The Petitioner, a legal consultant, proposed to start her own consultancy business assisting U.S. and Brazilian companies with cross-border investment, tax, and regulatory matters, later expanding to tax credits, litigation, and affordable housing services.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“a simple claim of what she hopes her business will achieve amounts to little more than conjecture”

“the Petitioner does not offer an evidentiary basis to conclude that the "ripple effects" of her proposed endeavor will extend beyond her own business and clients”

“the importance of overall industries and the occupations within them does not necessarily establish the national importance of the proposed endeavor”

“We conclude that the claimed impact of her endeavor is overbroad, generalized, and unsubstantiated.”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

• business plan · discounted

  “a simple claim of what she hopes her business will achieve amounts to little more than conjecture”

  AAO decision text
• recommendation letter · ignored
• certification membership · ignored
• other · discounted

  “The Petitioner's reliance on background information and statistics concerning the economic worth and value of an industry is misplaced”

  AAO decision text
• other · discounted

  “we do not analyze this evidence in the decision because it relates to the second Dhanasar prong”

  AAO decision text

Where this case turned

• Business plan speculative · p1 — projections without a documented basis or steps
• Economic claims unsupported · p1 — job/revenue projections with no corroborating basis
• Field importance conflated with endeavor · p1 — argues the field matters, not the specific endeavor
• Occupational shortage argument rejected · p1 — argues a labor shortage — the labor-certification question, not Dhanasar

Notable

AAO explicitly declined to analyze qualifications, business plan credentials, and even the Petitioner's real estate holdings/financial capacity because these relate to prong 2, keeping the decision strictly confined to prong 1's national importance analysis; also notes Petitioner changed business name and plan on appeal (from consultancy to affordable housing/tax credits) but found the revised plan equally speculative.

Authorities this decision leans on

From the doctrinal survivor set — 187 authority tests across 47 distinct authorities cleared the differential-lift gates. Only those appear here.

• 8 C.F.R. 103.3
• Matter of L-A-C-
• Poursina v. USCIS

Cases in adjacent profiles

• The Petitioner proposed to work as an IT consultant in the United States, providing cybersecurity and digital transforma
• The petitioner proposed to establish his own company providing specialized business consultancy, auditing, and training
• The petitioner proposed to work as a consultant engineer through his own company, specializing in development projects t
• The Petitioner proposed to start a project management consultancy in the United States that would help small and mid-siz
• The Petitioner proposed to establish a legal consultancy in the United States focused on alternative dispute resolution